The United States and Caribbean nations regularly restrict access to asylum processes for people with possible protection needs by engaging in intervention operations at sea that fail to provide meaningful individual review of requests for protection in an appropriate and safe location. (Christian Fuchs — Jesuit Refugee Service/SUA)

"Many governments are still inventing new excuses to justify the closure of their borders to asylum seekers instead of working to find durable solutions to forced displacement. This approach leads to tremendous human suffering while ignoring the universal obligation to protect the fundamental human rights of forced migrants," said JRS International Director Fr. Peter Balleis, S.J.

(Rome) December 8, 2011 — In its latest report, Safe and Secure: How do Refugees Experience Europe's Borders, Jesuit Refugee Service finds ample evidence that European governments actively hinder refugee arrivals. JRS field offices confirm these deplorable practices are not limited to Europe; they are rapidly becoming the norm throughout Asia and Africa.

Countries in the Americas also continue to struggle when balancing the security of national borders against human rights obligations. The United States and Caribbean nations regularly restrict access to asylum processes for people with possible protection needs by engaging in intervention operations at sea that fail to provide meaningful individual review of requests for protection in an appropriate and safe location. The Dominican Republic has also in the past year expelled large numbers of Haitians without making an effort to assess their protection claims.

On December 10, as the world commemorates the anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Jesuit Refugee Service urges states to:

• respond swiftly to all migrants and refugees in distress at sea and offer all those apprehended, including at land borders, access to procedures to determine whether they are in need of international protection; and

• end the practice of forcibly removing migrants to third countries where their human rights cannot be effectively protected.

"Sixty years after the formal adoption of the 1951 UN refugee convention, many governments are still inventing new excuses to justify the closure of their borders to asylum seekers instead of working to find durable solutions to forced displacement. This approach leads to tremendous human suffering while ignoring the universal obligation to protect the fundamental human rights of forced migrants," said JRS International Director Fr. Peter Balleis, S.J.

The experience of one Eritrean refugee, published in the report, is far too familiar. The boat on which he was fleeing was intercepted by Greek state officials, who then confiscated the engine and abandoned its occupants. Although he was rescued by fishermen, more than 15,000 other people have lost their lives trying to reach safety in Europe since 1994. Countless others face risks of other serious human rights violations, as recent events in Libya have shown.

Even those who make it to Europe cannot be considered safe. Research demonstrates that the EU policy of returning asylum seekers to the member state of first entry overlooks wide variations in national asylum practices in terms of quality, access and safeguards. Consequently, many refugees risk abuse, and may be returned, directly or indirectly, to their countries of origin – in violation of international refugee and human rights law.

Numerous states in the Asia Pacific region routinely engage in illegal practices denying forced migrants access to their territories and expelling those arrivals without considering their asylum claims. The Thai authorities forcibly interdict ethnic Rohingya asylum seekers at sea. Cambodia, Malaysia and Thailand have all returned ethnic Uighur asylum seekers to China before their asylum applications could be considered, and Australia has recently sought to return boat arrivals to Malaysia. Although this policy has been abandoned for now, it represents a growing exclusionary trend.

In recent years, many African countries — which continue to bear far more responsibility for refugees than do developed nations — have sought to prevent more displaced persons from crossing their borders. For instance, Kenya has repeatedly closed its borders with Somalia to refugees fleeing conflict, exposing refugees to arbitrary arrests, beatings and other human rights violations, including forced deportations.

Both Angola and South Africa arbitrarily prevent refugees who have travelled through a transit country such as the Democratic Republic of Congo, Mozambique and Zimbabwe, from entering their territories, maintaining that they could have applied for asylum in that country. Unfortunately, as recently found in a study by the NGO Lawyers for Human Rights, mechanisms to provide protection in these countries do not exist, leaving refugees at a high risk of persecution and exploitation.

"We call on European and other industrialized states to help developing nations hosting disproportionate populations of forced migrants. This could be achieved, at least in part, by resettling more refugees to richer nations and by allocating more technical and financial resources to poorer host countries," said Fr. Balleis.

Notes

This JRS report highlights the difficulties asylum seekers face gaining access protection on European territory. EU polices that hinder refugee protection in favour of stronger border control are a key factor. Readmission agreements with neighbouring countries enable EU states to send migrants back to countries with poor protection records, such as Ukraine.

The report includes contributions by:

• Two refugees: the first, Somali refugee Sayeed Mujadadi, describes his failed attempts to find protection in Belgium and his repeated detainment in Hungarian facilities; and the second, Afghan refugee Hakima Marina, details her harrowing journey from Afghanistan, family and their detention in Ukraine.